April 25, 2024

Digital Domain: BranchOut and BeKnown Vie for LinkedIn’s Reach

That distinction has given it staying power as Facebook’s predecessors have dropped away and as Facebook has grown to dwarf other sites. By keeping professional identity pristinely separate from the personal and the messy, LinkedIn, which is now publicly traded, has grown to more than 135 million members in 200 countries.

But challengers have arrived, in the form of apps. Rather than starting from scratch, independent software developers are trying to add a professional layer to Facebook — and are hoping that users will accept a less-than-complete separation of the professional and the personal.

“LinkedIn likes to say, ‘Facebook is for fun and LinkedIn is for professional purposes.’ What I like to argue is that’s no longer correct,” says Rick Marini, the chief executive of BranchOut, a start-up that offers a Facebook app for job-related networking.

“I get asked for introductions to my LinkedIn connections all the time.” Mr. Marini says. “The problem is, these are people I’ve met for five minutes at a conference and I don’t feel comfortable vouching for them. My Facebook friends are all my real friends.” (The gregarious Mr. Marini has an impressive number of “real friends”: 1,800 Facebook friends, he says.)

When users join BranchOut, the software pulls information from Facebook about their education, current employer and job title, leaving out everything else.

Excluding things like indiscreet photos, however, doesn’t necessarily make Facebook an excellent basis for a professional identity. BranchOut shows prospective employers a person’s network of Facebook friends. These aren’t likely to have been assembled the way they are at LinkedIn, with the idea that one’s connections will be reviewed by strangers checking on professional qualifications.

“There are some people I’d prefer not to interact with in my professional career, but I’m still good friends with,” says Tom Chevalier, global product manager at Monster Worldwide. Mr. Chevalier oversees Monster’s BeKnown, a Facebook app that competes directly with BranchOut.

BeKnown pulls more information from Facebook than BranchOut does, but it lists friends specifically chosen by the user, and only if those friends consent to be included. BeKnown’s design suggests that users must be careful about what parts of their Facebook identities should be imported into their professional profile.

Why not invest the same amount of time building a profile over at LinkedIn? Mr. Chevalier points to the fact that the average Facebook user visits the Web site more than 30 times a month, and he contends that convenience is important. “By having this proximity to Facebook,” he says, “we can help users think about their career more frequently.”

Applicants, of course, want to go where the most prospective employers are found; and employers, where the most candidates are. In both cases, this works in LinkedIn’s favor.

LinkedIn’s single largest business is selling access to information about its members. They are treated as “passive” job candidates: they aren’t necessarily seeking a job but have signaled their receptivity to new professional possibilities by joining LinkedIn and providing details about work experiences and skills.

David Hahn, vice president for product management at LinkedIn, says his company’s business clients “do not have to put up a ‘Help Wanted’ sign in the window and see who comes in.” He adds: “They can instead proactively go after the right person by looking over the professional experiences and skills of our 135 million-plus members.”

The company says 75 of the Fortune 100 companies are clients.

LinkedIn receives an average of 95 million unique monthly visitors, according to comScore data for November 2011. The Facebook apps are lagging far behind. BranchOut, founded in July 2010, is drawing about one million unique monthly visitors, occupying 298th place last week on AppData.com’s leader board for Facebook apps; BeKnown, introduced in July 2011, has only 170,000.

MR. MARINI concedes that LinkedIn has command of the professions, but he says that leaves ample opportunity for BranchOut to serve others. LinkedIn does a good job addressing the smaller part of the work force considered to be “white collar/managerial,” he says. The remainder, he adds, tends to be on Facebook — “blue-collar, hourly, temporary, cashiers, clerks, construction workers, returning military.”

Mr. Hahn of LinkedIn says his company “welcomes anyone who thinks in terms of a career instead of a job.” Using a broad definition of “professional” adopted by the International Labor Organization, LinkedIn says there are an estimated 640 million professionals out of a global work force of approximately 3.3 billion, leaving plenty of room for the site to grow.

Mr. Hahn notes that Facebook users clearly love games like CityVille and Texas HoldEm Poker, which draw millions of users. But the relatively minuscule use of the Facebook apps that venture into professional profiles or networking, he says, is “evidence that users clearly want to keep their professional lives separate.”

Randall Stross is an author based in Silicon Valley and a professor of business at San Jose State University. E-mail: stross@nytimes.com.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=0027a647bef68fff54160fe2f5d2773a

Digital Domain: Consumer Reports, Going Strong at 75 — Digital Domain

Well, “business” is not the right word, as there are no profits or losses to track: it’s a nonprofit. But the magazine and Web site generated $182 million in revenue in the 2011 fiscal year, which ended May 31. That pays for a lot of professional testing — of cars and trucks, washers and dryers, televisions, children’s car seats, mattresses, treadmills and cellphone plans — all told, more than 3,600 products and services a year.

Consumer Reports started its Web site in 1997; by 2001, it had 557,000 subscribers. That number has grown to 3.3 million this year, an increase of nearly 500 percent in 10 years. It has more than six times as many digital subscribers as The Wall Street Journal, the leader among newspapers.

And in August, Consumer Reports started generating more revenue from digital subscriptions than from print — a feat that must make it the envy of the print world struggling to make that transition. Even more amazingly, Consumer Reports has enjoyed success on the Web without losing print subscribers — those have held steady since 2001 at around four million.

Subscribers who sign up for access to the Web site pay $26 for a year or $5.95 monthly. A smartphone app is available, and this month an iPad version was introduced, with varying price levels.

“Five years ago, the Web site was just the magazine put online, word for word,” says Kevin McKean, Consumer Reports’ editorial director. Formerly, products were tested in batches, but today testing occurs whenever a new model is released. Results are quickly available online, instead of being held up for the once-a-year roundup of reviews of a particular product category in the magazine.

Consumer Reports’ online success is not necessarily a bellwether for other Web sites seeking paying subscribers, says Bill Grueskin, dean of academic affairs at the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University and formerly managing editor of WSJ.com.

“It isn’t much of a leap for people to pay $5.95 a month for access to a database that will help them make a wise purchase of a $500 dishwasher or a $25,000 car,” Mr. Grueskin says. “It is much harder to get consumers — particularly those trained for the past 15 years to expect content for free — to pay for coverage of metro news, football games or politics.”

Consumer Reports has been helped by consistency in its payment policy, he says: “I don’t recall them ever taking the subscription wall down and then rebuilding it the next year. So customers understand that they can’t ‘wait it out’ while the publisher vacillates between paid and free.”

A consistent policy of not allowing advertisements has helped Consumer Reports protect a reputation for clearsighted recommendations, untainted by commercial considerations. It also keeps its name away from use as an endorsement. Merchants whose products earn a spot on the recommended list would like nothing better than to mention it, but Consumer Reports forbids them from doing so.

Well before the term “crowdsourcing” arose, Consumer Reports supplemented its lab testing with surveys of subscribers, asking them to report on their experiences with various products. Its 2011 annual questionnaire drew 960,000 responses, more than double those in 2001, and included reports on the respondents’ 1.4 million vehicles.

When it comes to helping consumers buy a used car, Consumer Reports owns the mother lode of useful data. But consumers can find useful, free information elsewhere on many products. Amazon’s customers, for example, post reviews and all sorts of information that doesn’t always fit into the slots used by Consumer Reports. Mr. Grueskin gave an example: when setting up a Wii game console recently for his daughter, he ran into a problem. “I found the solution on an Amazon chat board, not on Consumer Reports’ site,” he says.

Consumer Reports is rather set in its ways. The confusing symbols it uses for its ratings — the filled-in, partially filled-in or empty circles, in red or black — violate plenty of graphic design principles. Mr. McKean says that he is aware of the shortcomings of the circle, referred to internally as “the Blob,” but that it has been hard to discard because many subscribers regard it as “a critical part of our DNA.”

The organization has moved to inject some youthful creativity into its culture: in 2008, it acquired Consumerist Media. The Consumerist gets three million unique monthly visitors, who snack on summaries of news stories about defective products, horrendous customer service, billing outrages and other delectable morsels.

Mr. McKean says the Consumerist pulls in younger people who are then exposed to Consumer Reports’ promotions of subscription products. He doesn’t expect them to sign up, though, until they find themselves “enmeshed in sweaty-palms buying decisions.”

Consumer Reports continues to supply the kind of authoritative information that can ease purchase-decision anxiety. Robust at 75 — and more digital than not— it’s the spry graybeard of the information age.

Randall Stross is an author based in Silicon Valley and a professor of business at San Jose State University. E-mail: stross@nytimes.com.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=96871482fe3d34a4d42522beb41ece74

Digital Domain: One Site Fits All, Except for Advertisers

The problem has persisted despite many executive changes, revampings and rebranding campaigns that have tried to make Yahoo a destination as highly valued by its advertisers as its users.

Yahoo is second only to Google as the most-visited Web destination in the United States market, bringing in 178 million unique visitors monthly in June, according to comScore. That is a 27 percent increase over June 2008. But the company’s market capitalization is little changed from 2003. The company holds the No. 1 spots in news, sports, finance, entertainment news, real estate and comparison shopping sites, according to data collected in June by comScore. Yahoo’s e-mail service alone drew 2.2 billion visits in June, according to Experian Hitwise.

What a mismatch: Where else on the Web can you find, on the one hand, so many happy users whose growing numbers testify to their satisfaction in Yahoo’s services and, on the other, financial performance that is so lackluster?

A fundamental change in the way display advertising is being bought and sold is hurting Yahoo’s core business. Today, advertisers care less about creating a partnership with a particular Web site and more about the behavioral characteristics — as best as they can be known — of their target users, wherever they happen to be. More and more ads are placed through online ad exchanges, in which ad agencies buy from whoever offers the lowest price for users who meet the buyer’s criteria.

Yahoo sells display ads — at a premium price — to advertisers interested in claiming a place on its choicest pages. This is “Class 1 display.” Those purchases do not come via online ad exchanges. They require an old-fashioned sales technique that long predates the digital age — what Carol Bartz, the Yahoo chief executive, calls “face-to-face relationship selling.”

When Yahoo does not manage to sell the available space on its premium pages at a guaranteed high price, it channels the space as Class 2 display into the ad exchanges, where it is sold at much lower rates. In the second quarter, a significant portion of its Class 1 display space in the United States market failed to sell.

The impact on the company’s financial performance has been unmistakable. For the quarter, Yahoo’s revenue for display ads worldwide was up 5 percent over the year-ago period, which doesn’t sound bad. The problem is that there was high growth everywhere but the United States, where that revenue actually declined. Growth in the United States matters most because an overwhelming majority of the company’s revenue comes from this single market.

Ms. Bartz, Yahoo’s chief executive since January 2009, said in a conference call after the earnings report that the reasons for the shortfall were recent moves at its United States sales group, including leadership changes, field staff turnover and organizational restructuring. All was being straightened out, and the new people were coming up to speed, she reassured listeners.

She did, however, have to lower the long-term guidance for the growth of display ad revenue, which would now fall below what had been projected just two months before.

Yahoo investors, though, showed no inclination to accept the idea that the poor display ad sales were just a minor execution problem. Yahoo’s stock has fallen about 20 percent since the earnings were announced on July 19. That compares with around 10 percent for the Nasdaq, so the recent market rout carries only partial responsibility.

KEN SENA, a director in the equity research group at Evercore Partners, says he doesn’t believe that Yahoo’s strategic position is hopeless. “Given the number of visitors who come to the site, Yahoo has an opportunity,” Mr. Sena says. But the company’s executives, he adds, must somehow figure out how to “create a new experience for those visitors.”

An executive who is working on the new experience is Ross Levinsohn, executive vice president for the Americas, who joined Yahoo nine months ago.

He retained a newcomer’s optimism after the disappointing second-quarter results were released. “We hope to tap into the portion of the $85 billion spent on TV advertising today that is shifting to digital,” he said in an interview late last month. Yes, “$85 billion” certainly has a nice ring to it.

Mr. Levinsohn did mention, however, that more of Yahoo’s choicest display ad space was being filled in online ad marketplaces. “Commoditization,” as he called it, “has been far more aggressive than most people would have thought,” he said.

That does not augur well for the future. Ask any Web publisher. Once prices go down, down they stay.

Randall Stross is an author based in Silicon Valley and a professor of business at San Jose State University. E-mail: stross@nytimes.com.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=a1f501a30639c7f2bf4dacc37016d96c

Digital Domain: Guard That Password (and Make Sure It’s Encrypted)

That’s how long it would take hackers to try every combination of 10 characters, assuming that the password is encrypted and that the hackers have enough computing power to mount a 100-billion-guesses-a-second effort to break the encryption.

But if your user names and passwords are sitting unencrypted on a server, you may not be able to sleep at all if you start contemplating the potential havoc ahead.

The hacker group LulzSec, for example, recently said it had gained access to Sony’s servers, where it could get at names, home addresses and passwords for more than one million Sony customers: everything was stored in plain text form. It posted information for more than 37,000 user accounts.

Sony Pictures issued a statement saying that “we deeply regret and apologize for any inconvenience caused to consumers by this cybercrime.”

Hackers would love to get their hands on a complete collection of all of your passwords, like those held at LastPass, a cloud-based password management service. At the instruction of its customers, LastPass stores user names and passwords on its server as each Web site is visited, then fills in everything automatically on subsequent visits.

LastPass reported last month that it had noticed some odd behavior in its network traffic logs and might have suffered an online break-in.

I’ve been a customer of LastPass since last year and felt a twinge of concern upon hearing the news. But my nerves were calmed by the enthusiasm of independent security experts who view LastPass’s security model to be exceptionally well designed. LastPass does not store actual passwords, only the encrypted forms. It does not hold the key to decrypting them — only its users hold that. It doesn’t even store the user’s master LastPass password, the one used to gain access to all the others: this, too, is encrypted before it is sent to the cloud and arrives at LastPass.

Steve Gibson, a security expert and chief executive of the Gibson Research Corporation, a publisher of utility programs for PCs, says he uses LastPass because its service adheres to his dictum that data “should be encrypted before it goes up to the cloud and then decrypted when it returns.”

LastPass, based in Vienna, Va., is a relatively new service, having started in 2008. Joe Siegrist, its chief executive, says that from its inception the company built systems to withstand every kind of imaginable threat, including the possibility “that its own employees cannot be trusted.”

LastPass does have a possible vulnerability that Mr. Siegrist makes no effort to shy away from: it depends on the user’s selecting a strong master password, one not found in a dictionary in any language.

If LastPass, or any company that stored passwords in encrypted form, were to suffer a data breach, the risk would be that the thieves could apply a brute-force attack at their leisure, offline, methodically trying every possible combination of characters until a match was found. With a physical safe and a combination lock, the thieves would need nearly infinite patience and a nearly infinite life expectancy to work their way through the possibilities.

Computers, however, work at a different speed.

Mr. Gibson posted a Web page that allows visitors to see how long it would take for a computer to try every possible combination of letters, numbers and special symbols to crack an encrypted password.

Here’s a little quiz: Which is the stronger password? “PrXyc.N54” or “D0g!!!!!!!”?

The first one, with nine characters, is a beaut. Mr. Gibson’s page says that it would take a hacker 2.43 months to go through every nine-character combination offline, at the rate of a hundred billion guesses a second. The second one, however, is 10 characters. That one extra character makes it much, much stronger: it would take 19.24 years at the hundred-billion-guesses-a-second rate. (Security researchers have established the feasibility of achieving these speeds with fairly inexpensive hardware.)

Don’t worry about the apparent resemblance of “D0g,” with a zero in the middle, to the word in the dictionary. That doesn’t matter, “because the attacker is totally blind to the way your passwords look,” Mr. Gibson writes on his Web site.

“The old expression ‘Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades’ applies here,” he says. “The only thing that an attacker can know is whether a password guess was an exact match or not.”

Mr. Gibson says that as long as the password is not on a list of commonly used passwords and is not found in a dictionary, the most important password factor is length.

A  SKEPTICAL voice comes from Paul C. Van Oorschot, a professor of computer science at Carleton University in Ottawa. “I believe any system will fail,” he contends. Consequently, he says, “I don’t use a password manager; I write my passwords down on paper, slightly obfuscated.” Even this, however, does not give him enough comfort for some things: he does not have an online banking account because of his concern about hacking risk.

An alternative response to that risk is to use strong passwords, gibberish characters adding up to at least 10 characters. Of course, it is absolutely imperative that Web sites store your password in encrypted form. Always, always, always.

If Sony had built more secure systems, it would not find itself being mocked in the public square. A new Web site has popped up: HasSonyBeenHackedThisWeek.com.

Randall Stross is an author based in Silicon Valley and a professor of business at San Jose State University. E-mail: stross@nytimes.com.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=d8ac1635a75a1f4a9e2bc5317a8f5c6b

Digital Domain: Microsoft + Nokia = a Challenge for Apple

Make way, however, for Windows Phone. Yes, Windows Phone. Despite Microsoft’s multiple, abject failures with mobile phones since 2002, many software developers and industry watchers expect Microsoft to become the second-largest smartphone player worldwide.

The evidence isn’t visible today, nor will it appear anytime soon. Even at year-end, Android will have a 39.5 percent share of smartphones worldwide, according to projections from IDC, the research firm. Symbian — used by Nokia, though it is not a major presence in the United States — would be second, at 20.9 percent, while Apple’s iOS, the software that powers the iPhone, would be third, at 15.7. Windows Phone 7 and its predecessor, Windows Mobile, would be far behind, at 5.5 percent.

These rankings are likely to change thanks to one player, Nokia, which has seen its market share shrink in the United States. It has formed an alliance with Microsoft and will switch from Symbian to Windows Phone software on its smartphones.

As a result, according to IDC predictions for 2015, Windows Phone 7 will occupy second place, at 20.9 percent of the market, ahead of iOS, which is projected to stay near 15 percent. BlackBerry, then as now, would be No. 4.

(In the United States alone, IDC expects Windows Phone 7 to jump to third place by 2015, at 15.6 percent, behind Android, at 48.9 percent, and iOS, at 16.8.)

Despite its recent worries, Nokia remains the largest phone manufacturer in the world, and it has no equal in building handsets inexpensively. Last year, it sold more than 452 million phones, including 100 million smartphones.

“The average price paid for smartphones is going to go down, and the total number of smartphones is going to go up,” says Andrew Lees, president of Microsoft’s mobile communications business.

Microsoft introduced Windows Phone 7, a major overhaul, last fall. By year-end, Microsoft had 5,000 apps in its store, a milestone reached three times as fast as Google’s Android, says Al Hilwa, an IDC analyst.

Mr. Lees says that there are now more than 11,500 apps. It’s not close to the more than 350,000 apps that Apple boasts for iOS. But the difference may not be significant.

“What is often missed is the diminishing returns after 1,000 applications,” says Thomas R. Eisenmann, a professor at the Harvard Business School. “If a platform attracts the thousand-most-popular apps, then it provides almost anything a reasonable person would want to do with a smartphone.”

I sought out iPhone software developers who have done well with iPhone apps to see what they make of Windows Phone. I was surprised that many are already adding titles for Windows Phone, despite the tiny market share.

“Microsoft has a perception problem. Everyone thinks of them as a distant third, but they’ve got a good product,” says David Roberts, chief executive of PopCap, a games developer whose Plants vs. Zombies game is among the iPhone’s top-grossing apps. The company just introduced its first Windows Phone game, Bejeweled Live.

Halfbrick, based in Brisbane, Australia, is another successful iPhone software developer. Last week, its Fruit Ninja game was No. 5 in the App Store’s list of top paid apps. It, too, has introduced its first title for Windows Phone.

Shainiel Deo, Halfbrick’s C.E.O., says that while games were not a major attraction on past Microsoft phones, games will be a differentiator that will favor Microsoft this time. For example, the Marketplace store of Windows Phone employs the same user accounts used for Xbox Live.

Mr. Deo says he, too, is susceptible to iPhone-centrism. “In Australia, almost everyone I see has an iPhone,” he said. But “the next phone for a lot of the Xbox gamers will probably be a Windows Phone,” he remarked. “And there are 30 million Xbox Live subscribers.”

Jeffrey R. Williams, a professor of business strategy at Carnegie Mellon, predicts that Microsoft will become a major player in mobile devices for one overriding reason: “They’re willing to spend billions of dollars, just as they did with Xbox,” he says. “And this is even more strategic.”

There is also little need to focus on tight integration with Microsoft Office, a keystone of the company’s marketing campaigns for its earlier phones. The Office integration pitch was aimed at corporate I.T. departments, which also made the purchasing decisions that shaped the personal computer industry.

The world has changed since then, Professor Eisenmann points out. “In PCs, it was business leading consumers.” he said. “This is a different game: consumers leading business.”

SMARTPHONES are a different case for another reason. In the industry’s formative period, Windows and Macs didn’t mix well on the same network, but different brands of smartphones share the same voice and data networks just fine. “I don’t think the network effects in smartphones are as strong,” Professor Williams says.

Nokia is in Microsoft’s camp. Good reviews of the software are coming in. Some leading iPhone developers are taking it seriously, and the company has plenty of capital to help it form alliances. Unexpectedly, Microsoft is well positioned to leap into the top ranks of smartphone players. A story to hearten latecomers everywhere.  

Randall Stross is an author based in Silicon Valley and a professor of business at San Jose State University. E-mail: stross@nytimes.com.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=709a64596f445af42f671791feb3d1fc